Thomas Turner, gentleman v. John Cropley, sr., and James Amner
Bury St. Edmunds attorneys: John Boldero (also in king's bench), Henry Walker
Error plaintiff's king's bench attorney: John Hyll
Error in king's bench (Hilary term, 1608) on an action in the court of Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk
AALT images for Turner v. Cropley and Amner In this action of error on a case of debt for rent on a lease of land, the
errors assigned focused on the fact that, although the transaction
occurred in Bury St. Edmunds, the lease concerned land outside the
jurisdiction of the court. King’s bench affirmed the judgment
nonetheless and thus indicated that jurisdiction was established solely
by the place at which the agreement was made, not by the location of
the land concerned. The lord king sent to the alderman, recorder, and chief burgesses of the
borough of Bury St. Edmunds in the county of Suffolk his writ close in
these words: James by the grace of God king of England, Scotland, France, and
Ireland, defender of the faith etc., to the alderman, recorder, and
chief burgesses of the borough of Bury St. Edmunds in the county
of Suffolk, greetings. Because in the record and process and also
in the rendering of the judgment of a plea that was before you in
our court of the borough abovesaid without our writ according to
the custom of the same borough between Thomas Turner
gentleman and John Cropley, sr., and James Amner concerning a
debt of £14 that the same Thomas exacts from the aforementioned
John and James as it is said manifest error intervened to the grave
damage of the same John and James as we have received from their
complaint, we, wanting the error if any there was to be corrected in
due manner and full and swift justice to be done to the abovesaid
parties in this part, order you that if judgment has been rendered
thereof then you send distinctly and openly the record and process
of the abovesaid plea with everything touching them to us under
your seals, and this writ, so that we have them on the morrow of
the Purification of Blessed Mary wherever then we shall be in
England so that, the abovesaid record and process having been
inspected, we may make to be done further thereof for the
correction of that error what of right and according to the custom
of our realm of England should be done. Tested me myself at
Westminster November 12 in the 5th year of our reign of England,
France, and Ireland and the 41st of Scotland [November 12, 1607]. Morley. The execution of that writ appears in a certain schedule annexed to this
writ. The response of Benedict Barker alderman, Robert Mawe armiger
recorder, Thomas Bright, and Stephen Ashwell chief burgesses of the
borough of Bury St. Edmunds withinwritten. The record and process of which mention is made in the writ annexed to
this record: The Borough of Bury St. Edmunds in the county of Suffolk. The
lord king’s court of record held within the abovesaid borough in
the guildhall of the same borough on Thursday May 14 in the 5th
year of the reign of our Lord James by the grace of God king of
England, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith etc., and the 40th
of Scotland [May 14, 1607] by virtue of letters patent of the said
lord king made under his great seal bearing date at Westminster on
April 3 in the 4th year of his reign of England, France, and Ireland
and the 39th of Scotland granted to the alderman and burgesses of
Bury St. Edmunds abovesaid held within the borough abovesaid in
the guildhall of the same borough before the alderman, recorder
and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough for the time being or
before three or more of them, of whom the lord king wants always
the alderman or the recorder or some chief burgess of that borough
who was the alderman of the same borough previously to be one,
each Thursday in each week through the year except in the week of
the nativity of the Lord as often and when to the same alderman,
recorder, and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough for the time
being or to three or more of them of whom the king wants always
the alderman or the recorder or some chief burgess of the
abovesaid borough who was alderman of the abovesaid borough
previously to be one, [sic] held before John Gippes then alderman
of the abovesaid borough, Richard Walker gentleman late
alderman of the said borough, Thomas Bright, Francis Pynner, and
other chief burgesses of the same borough. Thomas Turner gentleman complains against John Cropley, sr., and
James Amner concerning a plea that they render to him £14 of the
good and lawful money of England that they owe him and unjustly
detain etc. And he finds pledges to prosecute his abovesaid
complaint, scilt., John Doo and Richard Roo. And he seeks
process thereof to be made for him against the aforementioned
John Cropley and James Amner concerning the abovesaid plea.
And it is granted to him etc. Therefore it is ordered to Christofer
Johnson one of the serjeants at mace of the abovesaid borough and
minister of this court that he summon by good summoners John
Cropley and James Amner that they be before the alderman,
recorder, and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough at the
guildhall of the same borough at the lord king’s court of record to
be held there on Thursday May 21 [May 21, 1607] to answer the
aforementioned Thomas concerning the abovesaid plea. The same
day is given to the aforementioned Thomas here etc. And thereon the same Thomas puts in his place John Boldero
against the aforementioned John Cropley and James Amner
concerning the abovesaid plea. At which court held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough by
virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on Thursday May 21 in the
abovesaid year [May 21, 1607] before the aforementioned John
Gippes gentleman then alderman of the borough abovesaid, Robert
Mawe recorder of the abovesaid borough, Francis Pynner, Thomas
Baker, and Henry Gipps chief burgesses of the same borough came
the abovesaid Thomas Turner by his abovesaid attorney and
presented himself against the aforementioned John Cropley and
James Amner concerning the abovesaid plea. And they did not
come. And the abovesaid Christofer Johnson serjeant at mace of
the abovesaid borough and minister of this court now sends here
that the abovesaid John Cropley and James have nothing within the
abovesaid borough where they can be summoned. Therefore at the
petition of the abovesaid Thomas Turner it is ordered to the
aforementioned Christofer Johnson serjeant at mace of the
abovesaid borough and minister of this court that he take the
aforementioned John Cropley and James Amner if etc., and them
etc., so that he have their bodies before the alderman, recorder, and
chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough at the guildhall of the
same borough at the lord king’s court of record there to be held on
Thursday May 28 [May 28, 1607] to answer the aforementioned
Thomas concerning the abovesaid plea. And the same day is given
to the aforementioned Thomas here etc. [IMG 0623] At which certain court held in the guildhall of the abovesaid
borough on the abovesaid Thursday May 28 [May 28, 1607] before
Richard Walker gentleman late alderman of the abovesaid
borough, Thomas Bright, and Francis Pynner two chief burgesses
of the same borough by virtue of the abovesaid letters patent came
both the abovesaid Thomas Turner by his abovesaid attorney and
the abovesaid John Cropley and James Amner under the custody of
the said serjeant at mace brought here to the bar in their proper
persons. And the abovesaid Christofer Johnson serjeant at mace of
the abovesaid borough and minister of this court now sends here
the abovesaid precept served and executed in everything, viz., that
he by virtue of that precept directed thereof to him took the bodies
of the abovesaid John Cropley and James Amner, the bodies of
which certain John and James the same serjeant at mace had here
then ready, as it was ordered to him by that precept. And thereon
at the same court of record last mentioned comes here in that court
William Cropley of the abovesaid borough glover and John Amner
of the abovesaid borough innholder in their proper persons and
mainperned and each of them mainperned for the abovesaid John
Cropley and James Hamner that if it happen that the abovesaid
John Cropley and James in the abovesaid plea be convicted, then
the same William and John Hamner granted and each of them
granted for himself that the abovesaid debt, outlays, and costs that
to the aforementioned plaintiff in this part would be adjudicated
would be made from the lands and chattels of them and of each of
them and levied to the work and use of the abovesaid plaintiff if it
happen that the abovesaid defendants not at all pay those debt,
damages, outlays, and costs to the aforementioned plaintiff or not
render themselves to the said lord king’s prison of the abovesaid
borough by that occasion. Thereon the abovesaid Thomas Turner at the abovesaid court
of record last mentioned by narrating against the aforementioned
John Cropley and James Amner of and on his abovesaid complaint
by his abovesaid attorney complains against the abovesaid John
Cropley and James Amner for this, viz., that whereas the same
Thomas Turner on October 1 in the 1st year of the reign of the lord
James now king of England at the borough of Bury St. Edmunds
abovesaid in the West Ward and within the jurisdiction of this
court demised, granted, and handed over at farm to the abovesaid
John Cropley and James a messuage, a barn, 120 acres of land and
3 acres of pasture with their appurtenances situated, lying, and
being in Westley abovesaid in the county abovesaid to have and to
hold the abovesaid tenements with their appurtenances to the same
John Cropley and James from the feast of St. Michael the
Archangel then last past as long as it pleases well both parties,
rendering and paying thereof annually to the same Thomas Turner
and his assigns £28 of the lawful money of England at the two
usual feasts in the year, viz., at the feast of the Annunciation of the
Blessed Virgin Mary and of St. Michael the Archangel by equal
portions, afterwards, scilt., on the same October 1 in the abovesaid
1st year by virtue of which certain demise the same John Cropley
and James entered into the abovesaid tenements with their
appurtenances and always afterwards until this time they had and
occupied the same tenements with their appurtenances; and the
abovesaid £14 of the abovesaid rent for half of the one year
finished on the feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin
Mary in the 5th year of the reign of the said now king is in arrears
not paid, whereby action accrues to the same Thomas Turner to
have and exact from the aforementioned John Cropley and James
Amner the abovesaid £14; nevertheless the abovesaid John
Cropley and James Amner although often asked etc., have not to
this time paid the same £14 to the same Thomas Turner, but have
wholly refused to pay them to him and still refuse, to the damage
of the same Thomas Turner of £20, and thereof he produces suit
etc. And thereon the same John Cropley and James Amner put in
their place Henry Walker against the aforementioned Thomas
Turner concerning the abovesaid plea. And the abovesaid John Cropley and James Amner by their
abovesaid attorney come and defend force and injury when etc.
And they seek license thereof to emparl here until the next said
lord king’s court of record to be held in the guildhall of the
abovesaid borough on Thursday June 5 next following [June 5,
1607] before the alderman, recorder, and chief burgesses of the
abovesaid borough. And they have it etc. The same day is given
to the aforementioned Thomas here etc. At which court held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough by
virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on the abovesaid Thursday
June 5 in the abovesaid year [June 5, 1607] before the abovesaid
Richard Walker late alderman of the abovesaid borough, Thomas
Bright, and Francis Pynner two chief burgesses of the same
borough come both the abovesaid John and James and the
abovesaid Thomas Turner by their abovesaid attorneys. And
thereon the same John and James further seek license thereof to
emparl here until the said lord king’s next court of record to be
held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough on Thursday, scilt.,
July 2 then next following [July 2, 1607] before the alderman,
recorder, and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough. And they
have it etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Thomas
Turner here etc. At which court held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough by
virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on the abovesaid Thursday
July 2 [July 2, 1607] before John Gipps then alderman of the
abovesaid borough, Robert Mawe recorder of the said borough,
Francis Pynner, Thomas Baker, and Stephen Ashwell three chief
burgesses of the same borough came both the abovesaid Thomas
and the abovesaid John Cropley and James by their abovesaid
attorneys. And thereon the same John Cropley and James Amner
further seek license thereof to emparl here until the lord king’s next
court of record to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough
on Thursday, scilt., July 9 [July 9, 1607] before the alderman,
recorder, and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough. And they
have it etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Thomas
here etc. [Partly faded out and obscured; partly reconstructed from other
entries:] At which court held in the guildhall of the abovesaid
borough by virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on the abovesaid
Thursday July 9 [July 9, 1607] before John Gipps then alderman of
the abovesaid borough ... Francis Pynner two chief burgesses of
the same borough [IMG 2148] came both the abovesaid Thomas
and the abovesaid John Cropley and James by their abovesaid
attorneys. And thereon the same John Cropley and James further
seek license thereof to emparl here until the said lord king’s next
court of record to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough
on Thursday July 16 [July 16, 1607] before the alderman, recorder,
and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough. And they have it
etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Thomas Turner
here etc. At which said lord king’s court of record held in the guildhall of
the abovesaid borough by virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on
the abovesaid Thursday July 16 in the abovesaid 5th year [July 16,
1607] before John Gipps then alderman of the abovesaid borough,
Robert Mawe recorder of the abovesaid borough, Francis Pynner
and Thomas Baker two chief burgesses of the same borough came
both the abovesaid Thomas and the abovesaid John Cropley and
James by their abovesaid attorneys. And thereon the same John
Cropley and James further seek license to emparl thereof here until
the said lord king’s next court of record to be held in the guildhall
of the abovesaid borough on Thursday July 23 in the abovesaid 5th
year [July 23, 1607] before the alderman, recorder, and chief
burgesses of the abovesaid borough. And they have etc. The same
day is given to the aforementioned Thomas here etc. At which said lord king’s court of record held in the guildhall of
the abovesaid borough by virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on
the abovesaid Thursday July 23 [July 23, 1607] before the
aforementioned John Gipps then alderman of the abovesaid
borough, Thomas Baker, Stephen Ashewell, and John Manne three
chief burgesses of the same borough came both the abovesaid
Thomas and the abovesaid John Cropley and James by their
abovesaid attorneys. And thereon the same Thomas as before by
narrating against the aforementioned John Cropley and James
concerning the abovesaid plea complains against the abovesaid
John Cropley and James Amner for this, viz., that whereas the
same Thomas Turner on October 1 in the 1st year of the reign of the
Lord James now king of England at the borough of Bury St.
Edmunds abovesaid in the West Ward and within the jurisdiction
of this court demised, granted, and handed over at farm to the
abovesaid John Cropley and James a messuage, a barn, 120 acres
of land and 3 acres of pasture with their appurtenances situated,
lying, and being in Westley abovesaid in the abovesaid county to
have and to hold the abovesaid tenements with their appurtenances
to the same John Cropley and James Amner from the feast of St.
Michael the Archangel then last past for as long as it well pleases
both parties by rendering and paying therefor annually to the same
Thomas Turner and his assigns £28 of the lawful money of
England at the two usual feasts in the year, viz., at the feasts of the
Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of St. Michael the
Archangel by equal portions, by virtue of which certain demise the
same John Cropley and James afterwards, scilt., on October 21 in
the abovesaid 1st year, entered onto the abovesaid tenements with
their appurtenances and always afterwards until now had and
occupied the same tenements with their appurtenances and the
abovesaid £14 of the abovesaid rent for half of one year ending on
the feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the 5th
year of the reign of the said lord king is in arrears not paid,
whereby an action accrues to the same Thomas Turner to have and
exact from the aforementioned John Cropley and James Amner the
abovesaid £14; nevertheless the abovesaid John Cropley and James
Amner although often asked etc., has not to this time paid the same
£14 to the same Thomas Turner but wholly refused to pay them to
him and still refuses to the damage of the same Thomas Turner of
£20, and thereof he produces suit etc. [IMG 2149] And the abovesaid John Cropley and James Amner by Henry
Walker his attorney comes and defends force and arms when etc.,
and say that the abovesaid Thomas Turner ought not have his
abovesaid action thereof against them, because he says that the
abovesaid Thomas Turner did not demise to the same John Cropley
and James Amner the abovesaid tenements with appurtenances
specified in the abovesaid narration in manner and form as the
same Thomas above narrated against them, and of this he puts
himself on the countryside. And the abovesaid Thomas similarly
etc. Therefore it is ordered to Christofer Johnson one of the
serjeants at mace of the abovesaid borough and minister of this
court that he make to come here at the lord king’s next court of
record for the borough abovesaid to be held on Thursday August 6
then next following [August 6, 1607] before the alderman,
recorder, and chief burgesses of the same borough 12 etc., by
whom etc., and who neither etc., to recognize etc., because both
etc. The same day is given to the abovesaid parties here etc. At which lord king’s court of record held in the guildhall of the
abovesaid borough by virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on
Thursday August 6 in the abovesaid year before the
aforementioned John Gipps then alderman of the abovesaid
borough, Robert Mawe recorder of the said borough, Richard
Walker and Stephen Ashwell two chief burgesses of the same
borough came the parties etc. And the abovesaid Christofer
Johnson serjeant at mace and minister of this court now sends here
the abovesaid precept for making to come the jurors etc., served
and executed in everything as it was ordered by the abovesaid
precept together with the panel of the names of the jurors to make
the jury between the abovesaid parties concerning the abovesaid
plea annexed to the same precept in these words, viz., The names of the jurors between Thomas Turner gentleman
plaintiff and John Cropley, sr., and James Amner defendants
concerning a plea of debt: William Ullett, John Rockett, John
Frost, John Atherold, James Plombe, William Allen, John
Petchye, William Scofeild, Ambrose Briden jr., Thomas
Howes, William Ashwell, Thomas Ratlyffe, Nathan
Whitehande, Robert Bybye, Erasmus Howe, Thomas West,
Edward Cooke, Robert Martyn, Roger Shipp, Robert
Pentney, Oliver Markant, Roger Sharpe, John Kynge, and
Thomas Cooke, each of the abovesaid jurors himself is
attached by pledge: John Doo and Richard Roo. Christofer
Johnson serjeant at mace. Which certain jurors, exacted, none of them came. Therefore that
jury is put in respite here until the next said lord king’s court of
record to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough before
the alderman, recorder, and chief burgesses of the same borough on
Thursday August 13 [August 13, 1607]. And thereon it is ordered
to the aforementioned Christofer Johnson serjeant at mace and
minister of this court that before the alderman, recorder, and chief
burgesses of the abovesaid borough in the guildhall of the same
borough on the abovesaid Thursday August 13 at the lord king’s
court of record to be held then and there he have the bodies of the
abovesaid jurors summoned in that court between the abovesaid
parties concerning the abovesaid plea to make that jury and that he
have there then the names of the abovesaid jurors and that precept.
The same day is given to the abovesaid parties here etc. At which certain said lord king’s court of record held here in the
guildhall of the abovesaid borough by virtue of the abovesaid
letters patent before John Gippes then alderman of the abovesaid
borough, Robert Mawe recorder of the borough, Richard Walker
and Stephen Ashwell two chief burgesses of the same borough on
the same Thursday August 13 in the abovesaid 5th year [August 13,
1607] came here both the abovesaid Thomas Turner and the
abovesaid John Cropley and James Amner by their abovesaid
attorneys. And the abovesaid Christofer Johnson serjeant at mace
and minister of this court sends here the abovesaid precept for
having the bodies of the jurors served and executed in everything
as it was ordered to him by that precept, viz., that each of the
abovesaid jurors by himself is attached by John Denn and Richard
Fenn; the issues of each one of them by himself 3s4d. And thereon
the jurors of that jury, viz., William Ullett, John Rockytt, John
Frost, John Atherold, Thomas Howes, William Ashwell, Nathan
Whitehead, Robert Bybye, Edward Cooke, Robert Martyn, Roger
Shipp, and Oliver Markant, exacted, came, who, chosen, tried, and
sworn to tell the truth of the premisses, say on their oath that the
abovesaid Thomas Turner demised to the same John and James the
abovesaid tenements with appurtenances in manner and form as the
abovesaid Thomas above against them narrated. And they assess
the damages of the same Thomas by occasion of the premisses
beyond his outlays and costs put out by him on his suit in this part
at 12d, and for those outlays and costs, at 4d. But because the
alderman, recorder, and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough
want to advise themselves of and on the premisses before they
render judgment thereof, day is given to the abovesaid parties here
until the said lord king’s next court of record to be held in the
guildhall of the abovesaid borough on Thursday, scilt. August 20
[August 20, 1607] before the alderman, recorder, and chief
burgesses of the same borough to hear thereof their judgment,
because the abovesaid alderman, recorder, and chief burgesses of
the abovesaid borough here thereof not yet etc. At which court held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough by
virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on the abovesaid August 20
[August 20, 1607] before Robert Mawe recorder of the abovesaid
borough, Francis Pynner, and Thomas Baker chief burgesses of the
same borough came both the abovesaid Thomas Turner and the
abovesaid John and James by their abovesaid attorneys. And
because the abovesaid recorder and chief burgesses of that borough
[IMG 2150] want to advise themselves further of and on the
premisses before they render judgment thereof, day is given to the
abovesaid parties here until the said lord king’s court to be held in
the guildhall of the abovesaid borough on Thursday, scilt., August
27 [August 27, 1607] before the alderman, recorder, and chief
burgesses of the abovesaid borough to hear thereof their judgment
because the abovesaid recorder and chief burgesses of the
abovesaid borough here thereof not yet etc. At which court held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough by
virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on August 27 [August 27,
1607] before Robert Mawe recorder of the abovesaid borough,
John Manne and Stephen Ashwell chief burgesses of the same
borough came both the abovesaid Thomas Turner and the
abovesaid John and James by their abovesaid attorneys. And
because the recorder and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough
want to advise themselves further of and on the premisses before
they render judgment thereof, day is given to the abovesaid parties
here until the said lord king’s court of record to be held in the
guildhall of the abovesaid borough on Thursday, scilt., September
3 in the abovesaid 5th year [September 3, 1607] before the
alderman, recorder, and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough
to hear thereof their judgment because the abovesaid recorder and
chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough here thereof not yet etc. At which court held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough by
virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on the abovesaid September 3
before John Gippes then alderman, Stephen Ashwell and John
Manne chief burgesses of the same borough came both the
abovesaid Thomas Turner and the abovesaid John Cropley and
James by their abovesaid attorneys. And because the alderman and
chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough further want to advise
themselves of and on the premisses before they render judgment
thereof, day is given to the abovesaid parties here until the said
lord king’s next court of record to be held in the guildhall of the
abovesaid borough on Thursday, scilt., September 10 [September
10, 1607] before the alderman, recorder, and chief burgesses of the
same borough to hear thereof their judgment, because the alderman
and chief burgesses abovesaid here thereof not yet etc. At which court held in the guildhall of the same borough by virtue
of the abovesaid letters patent on the abovesaid September 10
[September 10, 1607] before John Gippes then alderman of the
abovesaid borough, Benedict Barker and Stephen Ashwell two
chief burgesses of the same borough came both the abovesaid
Thomas Turner and the abovesaid John Cropley and James Amner
by their abovesaid attorneys. And because the alderman and chief
burgesses abovesaid want to advise themselves further of and on
the premisses before they render judgment thereof, day is given to
the abovesaid parties until the said lord king’s next court of record
to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough on Thursday
September 17 [September 17, 1607] before the alderman, recorder,
and chief burgesses of the same borough to hear thereof their
judgment, because the alderman and chief burgesses abovesaid
here thereof not yet etc. [Further adjournments: From September 17 (before Gippes, John Revel, and
Ashewell to September 24, 1607 [IMG 0624] From September 24 (before Benedict Barker alderman,
Mawe, Walker and Bright) to October 1, 1607 From October 1 (before Barker, Mawe, Bright, and Ashwell)
to October 8, 1607 From October 8 (before Barker, Mawe, Pynner, and Revel) to
October 15, 1607 From October 15 (before Barker, Mawe, Bright, and Pynner)
to October 22, 1607 From October 22 (before Barker, Mawe, Bright, and Pynner)
to October 29, 1607 From October 29 (before Barker, Walker, and Ashwell) to
November 5, 1607 [IMG 0625] From November 5 (before Barker, Bright, and Pynner) to
November 12, 1607 From November 12 (before Barker, Pynner, and Manne) to
November 19, 1607 From November 19 (before Barker, Ashwell, and Gippes) to
November 26, 1607 [IMG 0626] From November 26 (before Barker, Ashwell, and Gippes) to
December 3, 1607 From December 3 (before Barker, Bright, and Hill) to
December 10, 1607] At which court held here in the guildhall of the abovesaid borough
by virtue of the abovesaid letters patent on the abovesaid
December 10 [December 10, 1607] before the aforementioned
Benedict Barker alderman, Robert Mawe recorder, Thomas [], and
Stephen Ashwell chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough came
both the abovesaid Thomas Turner and the abovesaid John Cropley
and James Amner by their abovesaid attorneys. And the premisses
having been seen and more fully understood by the same alderman,
recorder, and chief burgesses of the abovesaid borough, it is
considered by the abovesaid court that the abovesaid Thomas
Turner recover against the aforementioned John Cropley and James
Amner his abovesaid debt and his abovesaid [? damages assessed
by the abovesaid jury with an increment of 47s4d?] [IMG 2151] Afterwards, scilt., Friday after the Octaves of St. Hilary this same term
before the lord king at Westminster comes the abovesaid John Cropley
and James Amner by John Hyll their attorney. And they say that in the
abovesaid record and process as well as in the rendering of the
abovesaid judgment manifestly it was erred, viz., in this that the same Thomas by his abovesaid narration complains
against the same John Cropley and James Amner for this, viz., that,
whereas the same Thomas Turner on October 1 in the 1st year of
the reign of the Lord James now king of England at the borough of
Bury St. Edmunds abovesaid in the West Ward and within the
jurisdiction of this court demised, granted, and handed over at farm
to the abovesaid John Cropley and James a messuage, a barn, and
120 acres of land, 3 acres of pasture with their appurtenances
situated, lying, and being in Westley abovesaid in the abovesaid
county, whereas Westley is not elsewhere mentioned in the
abovesaid narration or complaint of the same Thomas Turner. It was erred also in this that it does not appear by the abovesaid
record that Westley is within the jurisdiction of the court of the
abovesaid borough and that the abovesaid tenements mentioned in
the abovesaid narration demised to the same John Cropley in the
abovesaid form are situated, lying, and being in Westley abovesaid
and thus the alderman, recorder, and chief burgesses of the
abovesaid borough had no warrant to hold the plea by any cause or
action outside the jurisdiction of that court. And thus the same
John Cropley and James say that in this it was manifestly erred. And they seek the lord king’s writ to warn the same Thomas Turner to
be before the lord king to hear the record and process abovesaid. And it
is granted to them etc., whereby it is ordered to the sheriff that by
prudent etc., he make known to the aforementioned Thomas Turner that
he be before the lord king at the quindene of Easter wherever etc., to
hear the record and process abovesaid if etc., and further etc. The same
day is given to the same John Cropley and James. At which day before the lord king at Westminster come the abovesaid
John Cropley and James Amner by their abovesaid attorney. And the
sheriff returns that by virtue of the abovesaid writ directed to him thereof
he made known by John Denn and Richard Fenn prudent etc., to the
aforementioned Thomas Turner to be before the lord king at the day and
place abovesaid as it was ordered to him by the abovesaid writ. Which certain Thomas Turner according to the warning made to
him in this part comes by John Boldero his attorney. Thereon the
abovesaid John Cropley and James Amner as before say that in the
record and process abovesaid as well as in the rendering of the
abovesaid judgment it was manifestly erred by alleging the abovesaid
errors alleged by him in the abovesaid form. And he seeks that the
abovesaid judgment on account of the abovesaid errors and others being
in the abovesaid record and process be revoked, annulled, and
completely had for nothing, and that they be restored to everything that
they lost by occasion of the abovesaid judgment, and that the abovesaid
Thomas Turner rejoin to the abovesaid errors. And they seek that the
court of the lord king here proceed to the examination both of the
abovesaid record and process and of the matters abovesaid above
assigned for errors etc. [IMG 2152] And the abovesaid Thomas Turner as to the matter abovesaid
assigned above for errors says that neither in the record and process
abovesaid nor in the rendering of the abovesaid judgment was it erred in
anything. And he seeks similarly that the court of the lord king here
proceed to the examination both of the record and process abovesaid and
of the abovesaid matters above assigned for errors etc., and that the
abovesaid judgment be affirmed in everything etc. And because the court of the lord king here is not yet advised to
render its judgment of and on the premisses, day thereof is given to the
abovesaid parties before the lord king on the morrow of Holy Trinity
wherever etc., to hear their judgment etc., because the court of the lord
king here thereof not yet etc. And because the court of the lord king here is not yet advised to render
its judgment of and on the premisses, day thereof is given to the
abovesaid parties before the said lord king on the Octaves of
Michaelmas wherever etc., to hear their judgment thereof, because the
court of the said lord king thereof not yet etc. At which day before the said lord king at Westminster come the
abovesaid parties by their abovesaid attorneys. Thereon, both the record
and process abovesaid and the judgment rendered thereon and the
abovesaid causes and matters above assigned by the abovesaid John
Cropley and James Amner for errors having been more fully understood
and diligently examined by the court of the said lord king, because it
seems to the court of the said lord king here that that record in nothing is
vicious and defective and that in nothing is it in anything erroneous, it is
considered that the abovesaid judgment be affirmed in everything and
that it stand in all its strength and effect, the said causes and matters
assigned above for errors in anything notwithstanding; and further it is
considered by the same court that the abovesaid Thomas recover against
the abovesaid John and James £4 adjudicated according to the form of
the statute thereof lately published and provided for his outlays and costs
that he sustained by occasion of the delay of his abovesaid execution by
pretext of the prosecution of the said lord king’s said writ of error, and
that the same Thomas Turner have execution. [Margination:] Let the judgment be affirmed. For outlays by occasion of delay of the execution at £4.
0622,
0623,
2148,
2149,
2150,
0624,
0625,
0626,
2151,
2152
